Depression scholar has a reputation for pragmatism (Christina Romer)

[babylonsister]

Depression scholar has a reputation for pragmatism
CHRISTINA D. ROMER CHRISTINA D. ROMER
By Scott Helman
Globe Staff / November 25, 2008


Romer, who has taught economics at the University of California, Berkeley for 20 years, is a highly regarded economic historian with a reputation for pragmatism and center-left policy views. The choice reflects both Obama's desire for moderate voices in his inner circle and his apparent belief that the past holds insight into how to solve the problems of today.

"The fact that she's done fundamental work on US economy in the 1930s I think is solid qualification, and a really good signal from the point of view of putting the economic team together," said Barry Eichengreen, who has taught with Romer at Berkeley for 20 years. "I feel comfortable knowing that Christina's going to be there."

Romer, who is 49, received her PhD from MIT in 1985. Earlier this year she and her husband, fellow Berkeley economist David Romer, were in line for tenured positions at Harvard University, until Harvard president Drew Gilpin Faust unexpectedly rejected her bid without explanation.

Obama, in announcing Romer's appointment yesterday, made a point of noting her expertise, specifically in how the United States emerged from the Depression.

"Christina has done ground-breaking research on many of the topics our administration will confront, from tax policy to fighting recessions," Obama said. "And her clear-eyed, independent analyses have received praise from both conservative and liberal thinkers alike."

Indeed, colleagues say that Romer, despite liberal-leaning economic views, is not doctrinaire, and that she has shown flexibility in thinking and a willingness to follow data wherever they lead. In a Bloomberg column this fall, Kevin A. Hassett, an economic specialist at the conservative American Enterprise Institute and a former adviser to Republican presidential candidate John McCain, listed Romer as one of a few economists he wished were leading the country's economic policy.

more...

http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2008/11/25/depression_scholar_has_a_reputation_for_pragmatism/

[Juche]

1. We need pragmatism

Idealogy has totally screwed up our economy. Greenspan's idealogy that 'the market will fix itself' helped cause this mess. I don't want right wing idealogy replaced with left wing idealogy, I just want whatever works to be put in place.

[Shiver]

2. If i could rec single posts...

The motto I've taken up with his appointments is "Ability trumps ideology". At this point in time, we need people who can get shit done, and from the get-go. All the appointments I've seen so far have this quality.

Bush surrounded himself with people who agreed with him and shared his ideology, and look what happened with that. Diverse viewpoints need to be present.

[Astrad]

3. Ideology vs. pragmatism

"Ideology" is not a bad word. It refers to nothing more than one's set of political principles and core doctrinal beliefs that exist independent of considerations of utility. It's nonsensical to try to assess political leaders or policies based solely on "competence" and without regard to "ideology."

http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/2008/11/24/ideology/index.html

[RaleighNCDUer]

4. Ideology and pragmatism should complement each other.

When you have ideology without pragmatism, you get Bush and the neo-cons. When you get pragmatism without ideology, you get the DLC compromisers who all but ruined the Democratic party.

You need ideology to guide your pragmatism; you need pragmatism to mitigate your ideology.

I'm hoping that in Obama we have that blend, that balance.